Rogers Media uses cookies for personalization, to customize its online advertisements, and for other purposes. Learn more or change your cookie preferences. Rogers Media supports the Digital Advertising Alliance principles. By continuing to use our service, you agree to our use of cookies.

We use cookies (why?) You can change cookie preferences. Continued site use signifies consent.

Why are the RCMP less well-armed than the average municipal police force?

Why are the RCMP less well-armed than a municipal police force?

The funeral procession for the three RCMP officers who were killed in the line of duty in Moncton, N.B. (Andrew Vaughan/CP)

Update, Jan. 16, 2015:An internal RCMP report on the Moncton shooting released today includes 64 recommendations on firepower, communication and supervision. In this piece from July 2014, Charlie Gillis examined the resources of the police force.

Few things stir anger among Mounties these days like the mere mention of the Colt C8 carbine, a semi-automatic assault rifle that has become industry standard in Canadian policing—but has been painfully slow coming to the RCMP. In the wake of the shooting of five officers in Moncton, N.B., members of the force have wondered: Could access to the guns have tipped the balance in favour of the officers who took bullets from a heavily armed shooter? Could the lives of the three officers killed that day have been spared? Could one of them?

In most institutions, this would be considered healthy critical thinking. But in the world’s most iconic police force, criticism has never been terribly welcome. Three weeks after the June 4 rampage, Commissioner Bob Paulson fired off an email to all 22,000 RCMP members warning his troops against “superficial, easy and incomplete” analyses suggesting the fallen officers were under-armed, while assuring members that an internal review led by Phonse MacNeil, a retired senior Mountie, will examine all aspects of the tragedy, from tactics to equipment. “We need to source and confirm this information before making any judgments,” the commissioner went on, adding: “Let’s be clear, there is one person responsible for the murder and attempted murder of our colleagues.”

Paulson did make one disclosure about patrol carbines—that none of the Codiac detachment’s six C8s was available to the Mounties who responded to the Moncton shooting. That served to fuel the growing sense of dismay among officers. The carbine, they argue, has proven its value to modern policing because this lightweight, short-barrelled rifle can fire many bullets, quickly and accurately, from a greater distance than pistols or shotguns. In an age when more and more bad guys are equipped with assault rifles and semi-automatic pistols, they give the good guys a fighting chance. “This is essential safety equipment that they simply weren’t willing to give us,” one constable from Western Canada told Maclean’s last week, speaking on condition of anonymity, because under RCMP regulations he could be punished for criticizing his superiors. “It’s hard enough staying a step ahead of your adversary. But this is a case where the RCMP has knowingly remained several steps behind.”

That perception has intensified as Paulson’s personal role in the interminably slow carbine program has begun to emerge. Back in 2010, when he was in charge of the national use-of-force program, including weapons, he rejected an RCMP-commissioned report that called on the force to equip all general duty officers with patrol carbines, disparaging the document as substandard and a waste of taxpayer dollars. That was 18 months before Paulson took the helm of the service; by then, fully 53 police forces across Canada had equipped at least some of their patrol officers with carbines. The Mounties had fallen behind their municipal colleagues in places like Delta, B.C., and Windsor, Ont.

Only after a provincial fatality inquiry into the 2005 murder of four RCMP officers in Mayerthorpe, Alta., reached a similar finding in early 2011 did the report come back to light—it was resurrected by a deputy commissioner, Rod Knecht, who found it relevant to the C8 acquisition program the force launched soon after. Today, Knecht is chief of the Edmonton city police.

It’s the sort of absurdity endemic to large institutions (in an interview earlier this week, the RCMP defended Paulson’s initial criticism of the report). But it has fed the belief among some patrol officers that their leaders in Ottawa either don’t understand, or refuse to face, how well-armed their quarry have become. They point to other officer safety issues, like the scarcity of body armour so acute that some officers pay out of pocket for their own. One Mountie interviewed by Maclean’s ticked off the incidents he says should long ago have demonstrated the dangers: the 1989 Montreal massacre; the 2001 murder of Const. Dennis Strongquill in Manitoba; the 2006 shooting of two Mounties near Spiritwood, Sask. “We’re a decade after Mayerthorpe,” he says, his voice rising with frustration, “and it’s, you know—here we go again. How does this happen?” Says another, based in B.C.: “I love the RCMP. I’ve served in all sorts of capacities for this force and I don’t like seeing it being publicly trashed. But I have no faith in the idea of our leaders protecting my health and well-being.”

To be sure, the RCMP has never been a gun-oriented police force. The patrol shotguns that officers carry in their cars were added almost as an afterthought in the 1950s, when it became clear that their service revolvers weren’t enough for officers confronted with armed adversaries (at close range, it’s a lot easier to hit a bad guy with a shotgun than with a pistol). Even now, there is little pressure among general duty officers to have the extra firepower within reach. “If you get out of your car without your hat on, you can expect to hear about it from an NCO,” one Mountie told Maclean’s. “If you leave the office without your shotgun in your car, no one’s going to say a word to you.”

That sounds fitting for a force whose officers are renowned for composure and diplomacy. But as assault-style weapons both legal and illicit have proliferated, the RCMP have been under pressure to keep up, like every other police department. Even before Mayerthorpe, where shooter James Roszko had amassed an arsenal of semi-automatic rifles and shotguns, forces in the U.S. and Canada were embracing the advent of patrol carbines. Once the preserve of tactical units, the menacing weapons were adapted for officers on general patrol, in most cases mounted in holders in the cabs of their cruisers.

The Mounties arguably needed them more than urban departments who got them first. Rifle and shotgun ownership is commonplace in the rural communities Mounties patrol, and it can take hours for emergency response teams—the RCMP’s term for SWAT units—to reach distant locales. To complicate matters, producers of illegal drugs like marijuana and methamphetamine have in recent decades migrated to the countryside, where they were less likely to attract attention from authorities. “When we do search warrants, we are constantly finding people who have handguns and semi-automatic riﬂes,” one B.C.-based officer said. “These are relatively low-level drug dealers. It’s scary.”

Yet of all forces in the country, the RCMP has been among the slowest to get its carbine program up and running. It began looking into the idea as early as 2006, with the Mayerthorpe tragedy still raw in its memory. But it wasn’t until early 2010 that the force commissioned Darryl Davies, a lecturer at Carleton University’s criminology department, to conduct a needs assessment on adopting the carbine. The price of his input was steep—$92,000, for a study that reviewed existing literature on patrol carbines, and surveyed firearms specialists inside and outside the RCMP.

Davies’s findings reflect the consensus that has since formed around the weapons: 77.6 per cent of RCMP respondents he polled believed patrol carbines should be issued to all uniformed officers; 91 per cent said it should take the place of the shotgun in police cars. The report recommended an across-the-board rollout of the guns, along with a comprehensive training program. Yet Paulson was unimpressed: “The report does not contain the appropriate consultation and detailed information required to assist us with making an informed decision regarding the advancement of the patrol carbine project,” he wrote to Davies on June 21, 2010, adding: “It did not lead me to conclude that we had received value for our money.”

Thus began a nasty to-and-fro that has gained new life in the wake of the Moncton tragedy. “Ultimately, this commissioner is responsible for not equipping his officers with a patrol carbine years ago,” said Davies this week, insisting there was nothing wrong with his work. Byron Boucher, an assistant commissioner at RCMP headquarters, pointed a finger back at Davies. “He did not meet the standards set out in the statement of work,” Boucher said Tuesday. “Because of that, it put us behind by the amount of time he had taken to process it.”

Indeed, delay is about the only undisputed fact. In early 2011, more than a year after Davies submitted the draft version of his report, the provincial fatality inquiry into Mayerthorpe issued its findings, urging the Mounties to give its proposed carbine program “high priority.” At that point, the RCMP turned to Defence Research and Development Canada, the research arm of the Department of National Defence, to do the sort of needs assessment they’d ordered from Davies. Finally, in late 2011, it settled on the Colt C8, a Canadian-made gun already in use by police forces across the country, including the Calgary police and the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP).

Even then the delays continued—many of them related to cost. Laden with enhanced grips, a U.S.-made after-market trigger and so-called “red-dot” sights showing the operator where on the target a bullet will land, the RCMP’s version of the carbines came in at a whopping $4,950 per gun, and that was just the beginning. To use the gun, officers needed to complete a five-day course similar to that used by special forces soldiers in the Canadian military, at a cost of $5,000 for groups of up to five members (other police services, including the OPP, have opted for a stripped-down version of the C8 worth $2,800, and a two-day training course).

Moreover, rather than following Davies’s suggestion of an immediate, centrally run rollout, headquarters left the key decision-making in the hands of regional divisions and local detachments. Each was allowed to request a number of C8s based on the risk in their area, but local commanders would have to find money for the carbines in their budgets. Those feeling a financial pinch could forgo the weapons, a policy that critics have sharply questioned in the wake of the Moncton shooting. As of this week, 1,333 of the guns had been sent out to detachments—about one for every 13 of the force’s regular members.

It’s a syndrome with which veteran Mounties say they’re well familiar. While the force has mandated that every patrol car be stocked with hard-plate body armour, they note, patrol constables in B.C. have been turning up at stores like DS Tactical in New Westminster, B.C., to buy their own, out of pocket. A single plate capable of stopping a rifle bullet can cost up to $500 per plate; so-called “soft” armour, which can stop pistol shots, costs about as much. “By the time they get here, they’ve already voiced their frustration with those above them,” says Martin Kerr, the store’s manager, who notes that many Mounties buy higher quality gear than that issued by the RCMP. “If you’re in that field, it’s your own rear on the line.”

Other officers have taken C8 training courses on their own time, preparing for the day when they might have access to the rifles. While the commissioner has urged them not to leap to conclusions about what transpired in Moncton, several interviewed by Maclean’s in the past week see the slow pace of the carbine rollout as the single most important operational question arising from the tragedy. At bottom, they say, the carbine program is about allowing officers to engage an armed person from a safer distance, rather than rushing into danger in hope of getting within pistol or shotgun range. “You can stop from 100, 150 m away, and yell at him to drop the gun,” explained one officer who is trained on C8s. “You can shoot back from that far and know you’ll hit him. Basically, the carbine gives you options.”

The same officer stresses that he is not questioning the decision-making of the members who got shot: “It could be that they had no other option but to get that close.” Rather, he’s critical of what he sees as the needless delay of the C8 rollout. Davies echoed the sentiment. About eight months after he received Paulson’s scathing letter, he said, he got a call from the office of Rod Knecht, then a senior deputy commissioner posted to Ottawa. Knecht found nothing wrong with the report and, according to Davies, seemed taken aback by Paulson’s criticisms (Knecht was on holiday from his job as chief of the Edmonton police and unavailable for comment).

A few days later, he and his executive assistant took Davies for lunch at Colonnade Pizza in the Ottawa suburb of Nepean, where Knecht handed him a limited-edition medallion embossed with the deputy commissioner’s coat of arms. Whether it was a token of apology, or merely a goodwill gesture, is unclear. But within a month of their meeting, the force had announced its decision to replace most of its shotguns with carbines.

Still, Davies is unlikely to hear any regrets from RCMP headquarters. Boucher says the force has done everything in its power to speed the launch of the C8, but had reasons for taking as much time as it has. “We are subject to so many inquiries and judicial reviews that any decision we make has to be informed,” he says, adding: “There’s a clear understanding within the organization that budget realities will not affect officer safety.” It’s a contentious assertion, given how many other forces had decided the carbine was key to officer safety—many as long as a decade ago. With retired and active RCMP officers now calling for an independent inquiry into the deaths in Moncton, it’s one that may soon face its own test in the cold light of a public forum.

Filed under:

Advertisement

Advertisement

Post navigation

Why are the RCMP less well-armed than a municipal police force?

If you go online you’ll see what versions of the AR-15 (which is what the C8 is) cost retail for a single rifle. $ 900-1200 will get you a carbine suitable for a patrol rifle from a number of manufacturers. Direct from the factory the price should drop by at least one third. If the RCMP is paying close to $5000 for C8 then I suggest an investigation be started into whoever approved or recommended the sole source and their relationship with Colt Canada. Whoever agreed to pay $ 92,000 for a paper study of carbines should be disciplined. The tax payers, as usual, are being cheated.

Do general duty constables need patrol rifles? Yes but only because the RCMP won’t or can’t train its members properly with the shotguns they already have. It has nothing to do with criminals being better armed. Violent offenders have had access to rifles, shotguns and semi-auto handguns for more than a century. The “need” is due to the nature of most RCMP recruits- smaller and less likely to be gun enthusiasts.

Many of the forces shotguns have folding metal stocks (the butt is very hard and too long for almost all members) that are one of the worst ideas ever. Members aren’t trained to use slugs (a single large projectile) for distance shooting and most find firing the shotgun unpleasant to the point of avoiding practice. Most have no idea of what a shotgun can or cannot do. The RCMP shotgun qualification consists of firing five rounds at one large stationary target in daylight. As a test of shotgun skill it’s a joke.

A 5.56mm AR-15 has much less recoil than a 12 gauge shotgun and the stock can be quickly adjusted for length. It is less powerful than the shotgun ( a problem in some animal control scenarios) and “less lethal” ammunition (i.e. bean bags for incapacitating deranged people armed with knives) isn’t on general issue. They are more accurate than shotguns but in practical terms will still be only a 50-75 yard guns in the hands of most constables. The idea of a “red dot” scope is problematic as they can be knocked off zero with the user having no way of telling without shooting or bore sighting the gun. “Hey you” carbines left in cars might be better off with simple iron sights.

There are several issues with your comment. First, the shotgun is a vastly different option than a carbine. First, the shotgun holds 4 rounds and duty load is 00 Buck. Each round requires a substantial motion to chamber and the recoil is immense. This means every shot you loose sighting of the target. Second, over 25 metres, the spread of the shotgun is greater than the average person. In an urban setting, this means unless you are very close to the person, you are going to have several pellets going past the target. Imagine this is a school and you have 100’s of kids around. Or, imagine this is a crossfire situation and your co-worker is 1 block on the other side of the target (but doesn’t know it). There are no folding stock shotguns left in circulation, because they don’t mount in the vehicles.

The carbine has a 30 shot magazine and is semi-automatic (in police configuration). The recoil is marginal and depending on the optics, you can stay on target or resight in fractions of a second.

The limitations of the optics on the carbine are an issue, and that is because the RCMP has chosen to use a pooled weapon system, where trained operators grab one off the shelf, and have to trust that it is still sighted. There is no money for issued-carbines… there is barely money for what they are doing now. It is still going to be vastly more accurate at range than a shotgun or pistol.

Your comments on training are always going to be an issue. The vast distances and range of communities that the RCMP serves makes consistent and relevant training expensive to deliver. It doesn’t matter if a recruit is a ‘gun enthusiast’, most members will never fire their duty weapon at another person. How do you train for situations that rarely occur, and more importantly, how do you maintain a mindset to respond to threats without going overboard?

People already get upset when they see the external body armour, let alone the hard carrier and a carbine tethered to a member. “Too militant”, they say. Well… stop shooting at cops, and they won’t have to dress up like Robocop.

We pay too much for everything… I think it has something to do with using Canadian-sourced products and suppliers if possible. And, these suppliers obviously know the game.

Your first paragraph indicates you haven’t had much good shotgun training so you’re in good company with almost every RCMP member.

Do you know of a case where police fired a shotgun at a person 25 yards away or further and hit a bystander? What makes you think 5.56mm rounds won’t miss and hit bystanders. After all they will maintain velocity for far longer and have better penetration. The entire rationale for the 30 round magazine is that you can keep firing after missing isn’t it? The cop quoted in the story speaks of 100-150 yard shooting. How can one expect not to have missed rounds?

If units are so spread out that the force won’t provide adequate training it’s very important to have as many enthusiasts as possible. People who train on their own dime or seek out better ways to do things are invaluable when the mass won’t do anything unless paid and made to do it.

While we’re at it perhaps some intrepid journalist could inquire as to how the RCMP ended up with its present Smith & Wesson 9mm pistol. Overpriced at the time of purchase (about 50% more per gun for 20,000 than better handguns (i.e. Glocks and Berettas) sold individually at retail) and such a bad design that it can’t be sold to discerning civilian customers. It would be interesting to see if the RCMP involved in the program went on to work for S&W.

Why are the RCMP lagging? It boils down to its being a typical federal institution. It is saddled with handling postings like the military along with gender and language quotas. It has too many tasks. It has an entire bureaucratic empire in Ottawa that other forces luckily don’t have. It has a steady outflow of people to municipal forces who are fed up with small towns and or the lack of opportunity to specialize. For many cops the RCMP is their last choice- preferring to stick near home and the better services in a city. The RCMP also wastes a great deal of recruit training time on drill and misses the chance to better prepare them for actual police work.

The answer? It would be best if the RCMP stopped contract policing and concentrated on enforcing federal statutes. It could then pool it’s existing talent and then recruit for cyber, language or finance skills and hopefully do a better job investigating major white collar crime, organized crime and terrorism.

Ottawa isn’t run well enough on ANY department I am aware of. No vision other than TAX GREED and illusions to get out money.

Until voters wake up and stop voting for the statism placatory corrupt parties of NDP/Con/Lib, and get some REAL leadership that isn’t lobby/bribe driven, we will continue to have RCMP, AANDC, CFIA, CBSA, CRA, CRTC, RIV, HC and other badly run organizations working against Canadians who make this country work.

UK cops don’t have guns as a rule unless they anticipate needing them.

But hey, RCMP probably need them as criminals have guns. But then given how everything Ottawa governemtn is run, it isn’t a surprise this is another management screw up.

Sort of like SARs people not having $300 night vision and infrared goggles. Just bureaucracy, apathy, incompetence and union bloat…can’t fire incompetence in Ottawa, it just accumulates like a cancer.

In a way, RCMP did it to themselves, how come Paulson does manage this force better? Same excuses he gave with sexual harassment of their own, I would be livid.

Bit no action Paulson perhaps needs to be replaced. And do it like Switzerland and China, not run by the PMO, but run by a committee of elected members. This way they can even get Duffy issues right and get the bribe taker and the bribe maker. Maybe even tell us more about SNC corruption and if it involved Ottawa and how deep it goes.

I see all this talk about the guns – the guns I don’t think have anything to do with this whole story

The answers to the questions are not getting answered.
Whether they had a pea shooter or a howitzer is not the question – how could they put themselves in a position to be shot.
You can take down a target at 500 meters with a 30-06 with a 4 power scope on it.

How many shots were fired at the suspect – none I think – so guns are not the question.

The training seems to be somewhat suspect.
$5000.00 for a rifle – $92000.00 for a study – get real lads – and they say there is barely enough money.

Every time they open their mouths they insult the intelligence the average Canadian.
Maybe the Mounties should go hunting in Saskatchewan and watch some of the shooters.

A shotgun with slugs at best is not all that accurate and as was mentioned you must be be within 75 yards plus or minus.
With an off the rack 22 you can take the head off a grouse at 100 yard – no recoil.

A shotgun with a 00 load is a very dangerous weapon with good possibility of some collateral damage.

The gun talk is this writers opinion is the spin to deflect the investigation away from the real why.
Poor training?? – common sense – obviously there was none.

It is not firepower that needs attention but rather training of officers to “STOP THINK EVALUATE REACT”. 911 calls to the RCMP described Mr.Bourque as dressed/armed like Rambo – some described type of weapons he had but the first five responding charged in as taught to do to control the situation – reacting impulsively rather than assessing what was transpiring.
The same in the Mayerthrope situation, the suspect angered over months by a RCMP officer, needled about minor incidents – reaction of a rogue citizen was to fight back resulting in the deaths of four RCMP officers.
It’s time officers are encouraged, trained to use their cognitive skills first rather than just physically reacting. While residents directed one officer to Mr.Bourque’s location had the officer taken time to radio fellow officers attending, lives could have been saved.
One hopes however that just becaused this incident happened that in subsequent incidents the RCMP do not immediately resort to killing civilians as the only solution to dealing with high stress situations but rather use their cognitive skills to implement alterenative means other than deadly force. Little hope that they will when one looks at the number of civilians kiiled as the result of deadly RCMP force (23 deaths from 2010-2013).

The police should be more concerned with having access to mental health practicioners. The Moncton shooter for one was mentally unfit as evidenced by the fact that his family had already asked the RCMP to remove his firearms due to safety concerns. He was interviewed by the RCMP (not a mental health practicioner) and the RCMP deemed that “our hands are tied” even though the current firearms laws clearly gave permission to remove his firearms in this situation.
Also, the price being paid for these rifles is nauseating! Nearly any AR15 platform rifle can be purchased for between $1,000 – $2000 dollars so why are the RCMP paying $5000 each! If funds are tight then end the ridiculous and ineffective registry which costs millions a year to run in every single province and spend the money where it belongs.
Lastly, using the term “assault rifle” is incorrect and is merely a pathetic media attempt to scare the uninformed. An “assault rifle” is a term created by the media and involves a rifle with select fire which allows it to be fired in fully automatic mode, something that is already prohibited in Canada.

First off, this is a redundant question. The RCMP in Canada are like the VCR, they are obsolete. Therefor making arming them more, well, a non issue. They should not even be armed like many police forces in the world, unless they require force to complete a task that requires lethal force.
The RCMP have shown over the history of their organization that they cannot even police their selves. Time and time again. With issues still unsolved regarding natives in Canada, and the involvement in hiding and participating in missing aboriginal children with regards to the residential schools that existed in Canada until 1996. Then we go into to how they treat women in the RCMP, is a less that stellar record. Next we go into countless accounts of excessive force, home, and abroad. How they turn in innocent Canadian citizens, participating in the torture of innocent Canadians with foreign countries, based on race, travelling records,with no evidence of terrorist ties. Not even going to go into details of the countless videos of how they have been caught abusing Canadians and the rights they have and are entitled to here in Canada.

They time has come to replace this corrupt organization, with a more modern police force. They need less arms, not more. They have shown that they are incapable of making good decisions in a quick manner, is, well beyond the scope of their training. Arm them with body cameras, not guns. Pepper spray and tasers will do just fine in most cases. When lethal force may be required, then they sign out that service weapon, and if they have to use it, then and only then will they be accountable for the actions they take. As it stands now, they have shown repeatedly, that they lack the understanding, or mental tools required as to when deadly force may be required.
Give them body cameras for a few years, see what comes of the behavior, if anything. Then, and only then should they be considered for more arming. It makes no sense to give people more firepower, if they cannot determine when to use the current firepower they have already.
Just because they are police officers, doesn’t not mean they may be good people. never forget that. They can and will make mistakes just like any other human being. Especially when stress is involved, which they are under constantly. Take stress, add more firepower, and the lack of mental help, training in how to and when to use a weapon, and you will only make the job of a police officer more difficult, not easier.
Think about what is at stake here, not only for the police, but as a nation.

Notice: Your email may not yet have been verified. Please check your email, click the link to verify your address, and then submit your comment. If you can't find this email, access your profile editor to re-send the confirmation email. You must have a verified email to submit a comment. Once you have done so, check again.

Almost Done!

Please confirm the information below before signing up.

{* #socialRegistrationForm *}
{* socialRegistration_firstName *}
{* socialRegistration_lastName *}
{* socialRegistration_emailAddress *}
{* socialRegistration_displayName *}
By clicking "Create Account", I confirm that I have read and understood each of the website terms of service and privacy policy and that I agree to be bound by them.